jonathanl

Jonathan here - the inventor of this horn. I've never been in that situation with a dog, but I did stop a black cat that darted into my path. I think the cat would have been the unlucky one if I hadn't had the horn though...

Keith99

Try that with my pair and you are going to die. They are gone now. Almost everyone feared Joey, when it was Wheatley that had spent 5 years on the street and knew how to end things.

Oh and for any others who are even thinking of this idiocy remember most dog walkers most likely drove to the park. Cars make a nice weapon.

Don't escalate unless you are willing to face the consequences.

Side note. I was once out walking the puppies at a local park (no bike path) and they were charged by 3 other dogs whose owner was frantically trying to get to their leashes. He had been careless and caught them only feet before I was dropping the leashes on my pair to give them free reign. He probably considered his 50-60 Lb dogs big enough that it was only whatever they met would be in danger. Wheatley's only real fight was against 2 50-60 Lb dogs back when Joey really was a puppy and they were picking on him. The lost in seconds.

CrankyOne

The really sad thing is that these MUPs can be shared successfully by all of these people and without inconveniencing them. People walking dogs can keep them to the right side and off the path. People walking or running or skating can stay to the right or move to the right when someone is coming from behind (eg, if they're walking 2 abreast). People can wear just a single ear bud. Just like keeping right except to pass on multi-lane roads, these don't cost people anything (except maybe only hearing from one bud). But we've become a society of type-A self-centered holes and so others need type-A self-centered hole horns to deal with them.

rumrunn6

report the threat to the police.

jputnam

911 response time on the MUP I commute on is usually under 4 minutes. Back off far enough to keep the perpetrator in view, you don't want to provoke a fight, but you want to be available as a witness when police arrive. (Don't call animal control, you're reporting the owner, not the dogs.)

FBinNY 

As far as I'm concerned, MUP really means multi use, but not really bicycling. It's for pedestrians, families with children, casual 8mph bicyclists or children on bikes, but not for serious cyclists who expect to ride at 15mph or more.

Yes, all cyclists are welcome, and at various times of the day can ride the path hard, but most of the time, treat the MUP as a pedestrian path that you won't be ticketed for riding.

Based on prior experience, I prefer unleashed dogs to dogs on leashes that stretch across the path making an invisible booby trap. Leash or no leash, I look for owners and their dogs to be on the same side of the path, and pass with caution.

CB HI

a sad commentary for paths that were once called bike paths and paid for with transportation dollars with certification that they would be used for transportation.

seeker333

+1

I once encountered a woman walking in the center of a ~20' wide section of MUP, two dogs on flexi-leashes, each dog walking on opposing far edges of the MUP. For a second I considered rolling over one of the low leashes, then I thought, no, someone (me) might get hurt, and stopped and waited for her to slowly reel her doggies in.

Jseis 

My fav MUP becomes an afternoon PITA for runners, strollers, dog walkers, etc. about this time of year. I switch to 5:30 am and problem gone.

NoviceJohn

I ride on my MUP all the time and when I see a person walking their dog on a leash, I would yell "watch your dog please" from a distance so I won't run over the leash or the dog. When I pass next to them, I would do a wave and say "thanks sir, ma'am or guys" to give the impression that I wasn't trying to be stern and appreciates their control of their pets.
As far as people who have their pets off leash, well, when you run over their dog or their dog made you lose control and crash, they're most likely going to be at fault just because the pet owner had no control their pet. I don't care if your pet is the most trained dog in the world. When the court sees a pet unleashed, the pet is considered out of control when it causes an accident. Just make sure you're not going too fast or the court may find you reckless and partially responsible for the accident.

Schwinnhund

Right then, I would've pulled out my cell phone and called Animal Control. The fine here for an unleashed dog on a public thoroughfare is $100.00 per dog. No exceptions. And if the dogs do not have current shot records, they will be taken to the animal shelter. He wouldn't get them back until he paid the fines, plus the cost of the shots, which they would give them. Otherwise, after 7 days the dogs would be put to sleep, and he would still have to pay the fines, + the cost of the euthanasia (usually $75.00 per dog). And, if he didn't he would be arrested and pay it off in jail time. Our Animal Control is run by the Sheriffs Department, and they don't fool around with this. Rabies is a major problem here in the mountains.

FLJeepGuy

I've encountered many cases of pet owners behaving badly or with poor judgement. As a life-long dog owner, I've gotten to the point where I never blame a dog for being a dog. For the most part, they're happy-go-lucky and inquisitive and unless provoked into a defensive response, easy to get along with. However, the owners and environment can change a dog; abuse by humans (owners or otherwise) or a rough environment (living on the street, etc) take their toll.

I own two large dogs, one at about 100 lbs and the other around 85, but as a conscientious owner, they are well trained and are always on a leash whenever in public. They're acclimated to people, love kids, and are always well behaved when approached with kindness. They are also protective of our family and I have seen them take on a defensive posture in more than one situation where I felt apprehension which they've picked up on.

What I'm getting at is in the vast majority of cases where I've had to deal with an unruly dog (as a pet, not including strays), the fault lies squarely on the owner. There are several example of inattentive or a-hole owners cited in this thread and I can add my own experiences. There are several families in my neighborhood that allow their dogs out in their unfenced front yards with no supervision or leash. I have to be careful when riding by their homes as I've been chased on occasion, luckily never bitten or induced to crash. This crap annoys me to no end and I will continue to report the homes to the authorities. To use a phrase from a comedian I once heard.... "You just can't fix stupid"! The best course of action is to avoid confrontation and just alerting the proper authorities. Sometimes a non-threatening word will help, but in the OP's case, if the owner threatened me with bodily harm, I wouldn't hesitate to report it.

kookaburra1701

Even if you have two buds in, if you just run in a straight line and look around before changing direction you can avoid problems. I confess, when I'm out doing sprints and hill work I like to have both earbuds in and the music cranked up loud, but I've never had a close call with a cyclist.

mrodgers

Yup, no different than the cell phone while driving problem that doesn't exist. This thread blames the ear buds and not the person who is not paying attention. Paying attention is the root problem, not ear buds, not texting or gabbing on the phone, or the host of other items everyone blames.

I was riding past a group of women walking towards me on the left hand side. I saw 3 women. I remembered passing them earlier and remembered there was 4. The 4th was walking on my side of the trail with her head buried in her handbag obviously looking for something. I could have gone around her to my left, but had no idea what she would have done, possibly moving over to the left as she found what she was hunting for, whatever. I stopped instead and repeated, "look up, look up, look up!" She finally heard me, looked up, and jumped when she saw me on a bike almost directly in front of her before she noticed. Perhaps women shouldn't be allowed to have handbags on trails like people shouldn't have ear buds on trails.

Had this woman been walking on her right side of the trail with her head buried in her purse, she wouldn't have almost walked into me on my side. If someone wearing ear buds is walking or riding on the right side of the trail in a straight line, even if they aren't periodically looking behind to see if someone is coming up, there would be no issue at all.

trailangel

Well if it's a Multi Use path then Bikes must yield to pedestrians and livestock.
If just a Bike path, then no, but what can you do?
We have a Bike path here called the Duarte Bike Trail in Bradbury, and it's pretty disgusting.... nothing but people with kids and toys and dogs.
You don't ride on it.

keyven

That's like saying a drunk driver could simply pay more attention and get home safely. After all, thousands of drunk drivers drive home safely every day. And completely sober drivers do get into horrible accidents.

So don't blame alcohol, blame the driver for not paying attention!

mrodgers

Not at all. Alcohol impairs motor skills and the ability to focus. A cell phone doesn't impair that. It is the person who makes the decision to focus their attention on the phone call or text message or whatever distraction.

When I am driving, I can not talk on the phone. The phone does not impair my ability to drive, the driving impairs my ability to talk on the phone. I won't take my focus off the task of driving and thus, can't carry on a conversation whatsoever on the phone. Thus, I don't use my phone while I'm driving. I have tried, but the entire conversation was, "What was that?" "What did you say?" "I didn't hear you." etc. If I was to go out and get blitz, then get behind the wheel, I would not be capable of focusing on my driving. The alcohol impairment would not allow me to.

mr_bill

Oh, stuff and nonsense, except for the pass with caution.

Upper left I'm going well over 15 mph. So is the cyclist off in the distance.
Upper right I've already slowed and am ringing my bell for pedestrian traffic.
Lower left I'm slowing more since I've spotted the dog, who at the moment is very well behaved heeling on the right of his owner on the far right edge of the path, the dog is looking right too. No worries.
And lower right the well behaved dog suddenly isn't, suddenly worries, and I'm braking very hard and deciding what plan B and plan C are right now.

And... That's it. I was moving slowly enough that the owner got his dog under control, he said sorry and I said thanks and I continued on my way - at "serious cyclist" speeds.

Imagine that.



-mr. bill

squirtdad

+1

Keith99

Bolding mine.

If this had happened to me 10 years ago I would have been seriously tempted to go home and get the puppies and come back with them on a leash. Now that option is gone, so I'd walk across the street and ask the cop who lives there how to get an assault charge files against the guy (a threat is assault). Might check with animal control also.

Back to the puppies. I was out walking them once when they got charged by 3 dogs off leash (well on leash but no owner on the end) with their owner frantically running to catch them. He caught them just before I was going to drop the leash on mine to minimize their handicap in a fight. It would not have lasted long. These were 50-60 Lb dogs and I'd seem Wheatley take on 2 as big or bigger that were picking on Joey when he really was a puppy.

But thinking about it I'd go with animal control first. I like almost all dogs, it is some owners I hate.

It is good to have local animal control that feels the same.

squirtdad

OP notes this is signed as a bike path....is it restricted to bikes truly or is it labeled as a bike path but not restricted (ie. MUP)???

if it is restricted I would suggest reporting non bike usage and working to get enforcement.

If is is a MUP, suggest reporting unleashed dogs and working to get enforcement.

MUPs require extra care and vigilance to ride.

A couple of asides:

A few years back a lady walking on a local MUP died when she was tripped by a dog leash from a guy walking his dog via bicycle....so it goes both ways

On of the issues i see with lot of proposed "bike" infrastructure, like bike lanes to the right of car parking is that there is no real way to restrict these to bikes only and the MUP issues are repeated

mconlonx

Luckily, we have no MUPs in the local area to get all het up about...

Once, I was driving along through a neighborhood, slightly in excess of the speed limit -- 30 in a 25 -- slowing to legal speeds as I came upon two pedestrians. My focus was on avoiding them, giving them wide berth, as I would do for a cyclist, when one of them jumps out into the street forcing me to stop... her unleashed dog was on the other side of the street and I suppose she thought I might hit the dog. She looks furious and yells, "Slow down!" I just looked at her and replied back, "Leash your dog. And get out of my way, you are obstructing traffic." She did not like being called out like that, not one little bit...

TinkerinWstuff

I'm sure I'm commuting the same path through Loveland that you are. It's signed as a Bike ROUTE and is a multi use trail. Sounds to me like your real issue is that you don't like dogs and can't stand seeing people break the rules on YOUR trail.

i have a harder time with leashes and dogs off leash are never in my way.

mr_bill

The risk of AIS 4 or greater injury to a pedestrian in a collision with a motor vehicle is <10% at 15 mph, ~30% at 25 mph, ~50% at 30 mph.
Fatalities are <5%, ~12%, and ~20% at each of those speeds.

Tell me the story again about "slightly in excess?"

-mr. bill

TinkerinWstuff

I stand corrected (although I stand by my opinion); I did see where Loveland has the trail marked as a "bike trail". And then the same section of trail, going the opposite direction, is marked as a "bike route". Just trying to be honest and fair.